Delhi High Court
Faiyaz Ahmad Khan vs Chandra Pal Singh & Ors on 8 August, 2017
$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Decided on: 08th August, 2017
+ MAC.APP. 351/2017
FAIYAZ AHMAD KHAN ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate
Versus
CHANDRA PAL SINGH & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Anshum Jain and Ms. S.
Bhalla, Advocates for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
1. The appellant, prosecuting through his father (next friend), is
aggrieved with the award by judgment dated 20.09.2016 of the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) on his claim petition
(no.76380/2016) in the total sum of Rs.33,65,466/- as compensation
for the injuries and their aftermath suffered in the motor vehicular
accident that took place on 04.09.2013 involving negligent driving of
a bus bearing registration no.UP-14BT-5186 admittedly insured
against third party risk with the third respondent (insurer), for the
period in question, the liability to pay with interest at the rate of 9%
p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition (24.04.2014) having
been fastened upon it (the insurer). The said amount of the
compensation includes Rs.28,57,104/- calculated as loss of future
earning capacity on account of permanent disability suffered, it being,
in the conclusion of the tribunal, 100% functional disability, the
claimant being in a state of severe right hemiparesis with global
aphasia, the medical opinion about disability being 85% disability in
relation to the whole body.
2. By the appeal at hand, the appellant seeks enhancement of the
above mentioned component of compensation due to loss of future
earning capacity on the ground that the element of future prospects of
increase was not factored in.
3. The appellant was 24 years and 3 months old at the time of the
accident. He was working as Customer Care Executive in a private
entity (M/s. Cyber Futuristics India Pvt. Ltd.), an official from his
employer (PW-4) having proved the terms of such engagement
including by producing on record the letter of appointment (Ex.
PW4/4) and connected documents which include the letter of
increment, letter of confirmation and salary slips for various months,
the service record (Ex. PW4/3) and leave record (Ex. PW4/2) also
having been added. It is clear from the testimony of PW-4, and the
documents he proved in the course of his deposition, that the appellant
was in regular employment wherein the terms of engagement would
ensure incremental rise and progression in salary and allowances. In
the face of such clear and irrefutable evidence, the element of future
prospects of increase required to be factored in [see judgment dated
28.03.2016 in MAC.APP. 548/2013 United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
v. Kamla & Ors.]. Since the age of the claimant was less than 25
years old, such element would be to the extent of 50%.
4. It is noted that the tribunal had concluded, on the basis of
evidence, that the appellant was earning Rs.1,58,728/- p.a. at the time
he suffered the accident. The notional income, upon addition of the
element of future prospects, would thus be (Rs.1,58,728/- x 150/100)
Rs.2,38,092/-. On the multiplier of 18, the loss of income due to
permanent disability would be (Rs.2,38,092/- x 18) Rs.42,85,656/-.
This means the award needs to be increased by (Rs.42,85,656/- (-)
Rs.28,57,104/-) Rs.14,28,552/-. Adding this amount, the total
compensation payable in the case comes to (Rs.33,65,466/- +
Rs.14,28,552/-) Rs.47,94,018/-, rounded off to Rs.47,95,000/-. The
award is modified accordingly. It shall carry interest as levied by the
tribunal.
5. The third respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced portion
of the award with corresponding interest with the tribunal within 30
days making it available to be released to the claimant. The release
shall be in the form of an interest bearing fixed deposit receipt taken
out from a nationalized bank for a period of fifteen years with right to
draw periodical interest.
6. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
R.K.GAUBA, J.
AUGUST 08, 2017
yg
